[rumble291]

Ive been using Vista for just over a month now and yes is an improvement over XP im still not convinced that is alot more stable than XP. My computer can run Vista alright but its not as fast as XP even though microsoft saying that Vista is alot faster than XP.

Vista will take along time before all the computers can handle it yeah it will run quickly and smoothly if you have a decent dual core CPU, 2GB of RAM and a Geforce 8800 but most people dont know how to build a computer so they buy a ready built PC and you cannot get decent parts for under £1000.

I just want to be able to do multiple tasks at the same time and with 1GB of RAM and a single core processor I can't. Ive already had a few BSODs and now i cant see the reasons why Vista is better yes some of it is more user friendly but do you really need it if you know what your doing? i dont im on a course at college which teachs me everything i need to know. The main reason ive decided to go back to XP is that Vista still has alot of bugs in it yeah its only the beta but still the release isnt going to be much better also XP can run on a 4 year old computer with ease even on my Athlon XP 2400+ and 256mb of RAM its alot faster than my PC with Vista.

Microsoft are blaming non-signed drivers for the stability issues which is an issue with windows i suppose but still i'd rather have no BSODs and my PC freeze than having BSODs for the tinyist error why can't they go back to Windows 98 where you could press control + alt and delete to try and resume windows.

Microsoft are already in trouble with alot more people buying macs and there effort to try and regain the lead is poor, With most people owning an Apple product e.g. the Ipod if they like it they look at other Apple products ive seen it happen with people i know and they go out and buy a Mac cause they look nice and they dont crash half as much as Windows.

Any of you guys got any thoughts on Vista and what to expect from the release, service pack etc.?

[Advertisements]

ouch! Seems like your having a few problems, but that is understandable, what with you using a beta version, I can tell you that from the beta versions to RTM there is a VERY BIG difference and RTM works very well and is VERY stable, I have an old PC (5 years to be precise) and it runs Vista fine!

I have an AMD Athlon XP pro 2000+ with 768MB RAM and (later today) an ATI Radeon X1650.

I have had 0 BSODs and have had 0 performance issues. Wait till Retail version is released in stores and give it a go (hmmm quite pricy I know) but there is a HUGE difference between Betas, RCs and RTM!

[CJIS]

ouch! Seems like your having a few problems, but that is understandable, what with you using a beta version, I can tell you that from the beta versions to RTM there is a VERY BIG difference and RTM works very well and is VERY stable, I have an old PC (5 years to be precise) and it runs Vista fine!

I have an AMD Athlon XP pro 2000+ with 768MB RAM and (later today) an ATI Radeon X1650.

I have had 0 BSODs and have had 0 performance issues. Wait till Retail version is released in stores and give it a go (hmmm quite pricy I know) but there is a HUGE difference between Betas, RCs and RTM!

[warriorscot]

Im using rc2 on a computer slower than yours and it does all the things you want it to just fine ive not had a single BSOD and ive used most of its newer features at some point, just today ive used the hand writing and tablet tools and they work great now, speech recognition works great too plus alot of other little things and it in general has ran as faster or faster than XP its much better than OSX in my opinion which is also much much worse on the driver side than vista and vista has picked up everything but my cheapo tv card and had drivers already that work well enough. Beta 2 was pretty slow it was before they did most of the optimisations RC1 was a bit faster and RC2 faster still and the retail should be even better than that.

overclockers.co.uk seems to be selling the OEMs now you can get home premium for the same as MCE the retail copies are overpriced but thats because they have 32 and 64 bit most of us need one or the other so OEM is just fine. Ultimate runs at only £40 more than XP Pro its a little steep but its similar to what XP x64 was when it came out pretty decent im gonna wait maybe another month or two then order premium or ultimate whatever my wallet can stretch to i would have even ordered it this month but i just got a new 22" monitor which skinned me a hundred quid this month.

Also Ctrl alt delete works just fine for me, and if explorer crashes it automatically reboots now instead of you having to go to run and start it again.

[CJIS]

I was thinking of getting an OEM version but technet is the best option all around! I wonder what Vienna is gonna be like, you think Vista is slow and buggy.........lol!

Edited by CJIS, 22 January 2007 - 09:44 AM.

[rumble291]

Yeah i was having some trouble but most of it was caused by my RAM. I just dont see the point in having all the graphics it slows your pc down yet i like some XP was far enough for me on the GUI it looks gd and why do u need to have transparent windows? lol. Yeah there are not as many BSODs. I hate the driver signing i was installing some mointoring software (everest home edition) and a window pops up saying that its trying to install a unsigned driver and most of it worked but i couldnt see stats on my RAM. Everyone i know is waiting for SP1 to come out before they get it. Whats the differences on the RTM?

Ive already noticed the speed difference on XP and i get 60-200FPS now on CS:S which is alot nicer than 20-70. On Vista when i was trying to copy to and from my PDA to my PC it really slowed down and freezed up a few times for about 30 secs each time with XP i dont get that. I was reading the reviews on vista and they were all saying how 1GB of RAM is like having 512mb on XP but for me it was more like having 256MB on a slow laptop lol

Edited by rumble291, 24 January 2007 - 11:22 AM.

[warriorscot]

I think CSS runs faster in Vista than it did on XP its much smoother and load times lower, alot of my apps work better too sonic stage for my mp3 player was always kinda buggy on XP but on vista it works flawlessly. And the transparent windows haven't slowed anything down if you have a DX9 video card worth its salt it was shown that it has almost no performance hit and its turned off for games, explorer runs faster its much more responsive. Vista is definitely much faster than XP in the important areas its one of the biggest reasons its impressed me, it runs almost as fast as linux does on this PC so that's impressive. I do like a nice GUI if you spend alot of time on your computer a GUI can make a big difference.

Ive got a 1Gb at the mo and its nothing like XP with 512Mb i can tell you that for a fact as i have a machine with 512Mb and XP downstairs ive even got a slow laptop with 256Mb(which runs XP fine by the way). I've read a fair bit about MS stopping the whole service pack thing and just releasing updates there is going to be one for vista and one for XP for compatibility issues and anything big that comes up but it doesn't really need a service pack either in my opinion only thing i can think of it needing one is to add there new file system later. If they had released it in RC2 state which they could have then i would have said wait a while but its about as polished as a release OS can get at this stage. The RTM has very few bugs release fresh hold was under 200 i think and they were at something like 65 out standing at the start of the year and it was minor stuff it got some more improvements in efficiency as well it also has dx10.

Edited by warriorscot, 24 January 2007 - 07:29 PM.

[rodneymckay]

When Vista business arrives in the mail I'll probably wait a few months before I install just to give the software companies time to get out some more compatable drivers. The last couple issues of PCWorld breaks down Vista pretty well. Basicly there is no hurry to switch over to Vista and XP can be run for years to come. Everybodies PC's are different with Vista. I've installed every beta since Longhorn 4051 and there has been improvements but I haven't been impressed enough to keep any one OS installed for more then a week. Not once did Vista pick up my XP OS automatically after install and I had to manually set up the dual boot using VistaBootPro. Its just my rig, Asus board or whatever. Vista won't be running smooth for most people for a good six months to a year after ciritical updates, patches, drivers are added. (Remember XP after it first came out ! )

[HPDV8315LOVER]

My brother just moved back to XP. Vista is slow right now and buggy as Windows ME.

Here's his spec:

3.0 Ghz Intel Pentium 4
2 GB of Ram
ATI Radeon X700 256MB

I dont see why it's slow for him.

[warriorscot]

Neither do i, my system has less ram than that and only a slightly faster gfx card with a 2Ghz AMD its not fast any more not even close to it and vista not only runs fine but runs faster than XP. Ive used GRUB as my boot loader for a while now and its the best way to dual boot even if you arent using linux, it probably doesn't pick up XP as you don't generally put in support for the OS your replacing.

I havent had a problem with RC2 ill probably get home premium some time next month, i was using linux alot but im not as much with Vista and ive never even considered going back to XP, Vista has just better in every aspect ive looked at, driver support is pretty decent in terms of what it can pick up and just use without anything 3rd party and there are vista drivers from the bigger guys now unless you have something unusual or from a not so great manufacturer drivers really aren't a problem, and its so much more stable than XP on my system XP would crash every now and again ive not had one crash with RC2 and its been months now ive been using vista. Its in all honestly the best Microsoft OS ive ever used its also the most stable and its the testing version as well. People say they will wait till the bugs are fixed, but what bugs? Ive not found a single one that hasn't already been fixed in RC2 or final and none that would stop me buying it.

Also PC World is a terrible publication every other article i have read from them is either plainly rubbish or biased im sure they must have some good writers but the ones i usually see write like they are in high school.

[rumble291]

Yeah i can see it is faster on some apps but when copying and moving alot of files it would freeze and not do anything. On CS:S I was getting really poor FPS and i couldnt stand it. I like Vista and im starting to miss it already lol but XP just runs alot faster on my pc for the things i need it to do. Vista is suppose to be faster than XP yet a reinstall of XP makes vista look very slow. I used to keep XP fast by not installing much rubbish and it was perfect no errors or BSODs the only trouble with XP is that over time it starts to slow down. I like the features of Vista it makes it fun to use but for the practical side its really not that worth it. Vista just takes up too much system resources like your school, college or workplace will have slow pcs like my old school had 1.8 AMD Athlons they ran XP as quick as mine even with my old pc being a AMD Athlon 2400+, 256mb RAM and a Geforce fx5200 it could run XP and play games smoothly on middle graphics. I will of corse upgrade to Vista but not untill i have a PC that can run it as fast as mine does with XP now.

[rodneymckay]

I'm a PC gamer and although I'd love to use XP forever its just not going to happen. The newer games will all require Direct X 10 in time. I'd love to use Suse 10.2 as my primary OS but Linux can't complete with MS gaming. I'm going to be running XP for quite awhile but I will be dual booting with Vista soon.

[CJIS]

I'm a PC gamer and although I'd love to use XP forever its just not going to happen. The newer games will all require Direct X 10 in time. I'd love to use Suse 10.2 as my primary OS but Linux can't complete with MS gaming. I'm going to be running XP for quite awhile but I will be dual booting with Vista soon.

A lot of people will I expect, but Windows Vista is a very stable OS and works perfectly fine here! As for Direct X 10, that is very true and Direct X 10 won't be available for XP if I'm not mistaken (not sure though)!

[warriorscot]

The openGL support is whats bothering me, openGL is popular not as popular as the other systems so games that wont run on vista arent that numerous but still its my only real bother i cant get KOTORII or HW2 to run which annoys me because i really vista and XP takes so long for me to set up the way i like it i have to install aston shell to get it usable for me.

[rodneymckay]

I'm a PC gamer and although I'd love to use XP forever its just not going to happen. The newer games will all require Direct X 10 in time. I'd love to use Suse 10.2 as my primary OS but Linux can't complete with MS gaming. I'm going to be running XP for quite awhile but I will be dual booting with Vista soon.

A lot of people will I expect, but Windows Vista is a very stable OS and works perfectly fine here! As for Direct X 10, that is very true and Direct X 10 won't be available for XP if I'm not mistaken (not sure though)!

I couldn't resist any longer and installed my Vista business yesterday. Wow. Running very smoothly so far and not 1 confict with software installs so far. Games seems to be running fine. To take a serious look from the outside in at Vista it appears to be a nice XP upgrade, but when you start looking under the hood you can see allot of improvements. coding, xml, la-de-da and all that.

[bmwboy]

Nice advice to gamers: wait a bit unless absolutely necessary, drivers right now are hit and miss.